When archaeologists first studied the city of Teotihuacán, located near
modern-day Mexico City, they excavated only the palaces and temples, areas
used by the elite upper class. All these sites showed damage from fire around
the 7th or 8th century. Early archaeologists concluded that the whole city was
ravaged and burned by invaders, possibly the Toltecs. However, this
conclusion has since become controversial. A modern alternative theory holds
that the burning was from an internal uprising of the lower class.
The passage describes the possible causes of a fire that occured around the 7th or
8th century.
Why might the early archaeologists' data have been misleading?
O because the Toltecs were a peaceful people
O because evidence of a fire cannot be seen after so much time
O because early archaeologists only looked at specific areas
O because early archaeologists did not know how to excavate properly
.4
The correct answer is: because early archaeologists only looked at specific areas.
The passage states that early archaeologists only studied the palaces and temples, which were areas used by the elite upper class. They did not investigate other parts of the city, such as the areas where the lower class lived. Therefore, the early archaeologists' data was limited and potentially biased towards the perspective of the elite upper class.